7 Answers
7

Yes. The bounty should be returned if no answers appear, I would also argue that this should be the case if no answers receive upvotes. Not returning the bounty is intended to prevent gaming the system, however, if you don't get an answer that anyone thinks is any good, I think the bounty contributed by the asker should be returned to the asker when the bounty period expires. Note that this wouldn't apply if there was an upvoted answer that also received downvotes to prevent the OP from gaming the system by downvoting an answer that would otherwise receive the bounty.

One argument against my position -- no answers or no answers with upvotes -- is that it encourages the OP to not vote for any answer that is helpful. That only applies as long as no answer receives any votes, however, so I don't think that is a realistic objection. If no one else votes for an answer, there is little reason to suspect that the OP should.

Bounties are meant to generate interest in your question. If your question is low in the ranks, and you feel that you have already expressed yourself, then you add a bounty on it to encourage interest and people to answer.

Once you add the bounty, the rep is gone. If you are worried about getting no answers, you could increase the bounty to an even higher number, and at that point you can almost guarantee that someone will answer the question. But the bounties are meant to generate interest and answers. If there are still no answers after offering the bounty, it might be time to consider whether or not the question is too obscure to be answered.

Consider bounties to be paying for advertising. Once you've purchased an ad spot, you can't get your money back just because no one bought your product.

Obviously, we might want to consider changing the name since it doesn't act 'bounty-ish'.

Yes, I think if you don't get any answers, you absolutely should get your rep back; you've paid for a service that wasn't delivered - that's a refund in anybody's book.

I asked a question (and I don't think it was a crap one - quite clear, but it perhaps is a bit tricky) that had very low views for a few days and so I've whacked a bounty on it.

Still, as yet, no answers, and the number of views hasn't gone up.

If after the 7 days I still get no answers, then I'm going to end up paying with rep because the community could not help. So the SO message is "If your question is really difficult, and you incentivise the community to answer, but they can't, then you'll be penalised".

That roughly equates to "please ask only questions that somebody here knows the answers to".

If this Q of mine ends up getting a good answer now, then of course my comments here will be less relevant I suppose; however for those people that do ask good, bountied, questions but which nobody knows the answer to are being treated unfairly I think.

As a compromise, what about refunding 50% of the bounty? The user did get increased exposure on the featured tab, but did not get a much-longed for answer. Refunding 50% sounds like a reasonable compromise.

While it might sound superficially reasonable, I don't think it's likely to happen. Most bounties acquire at least one answer before they expire, as bounty hunters hope that even a mediocre answer will get the 2 upvotes needed for an auto-accept. Even if they don't, the question will then have answers.

not yet, but I have a terrible suspicion that a recent question of mine will soon achieve this honor.
–
user135632Sep 13 '09 at 20:11

2

here is one example which had a bounty of 100 : stackoverflow.com/questions/2540149/… my own question with a bounty of 200 got a few more views but still no answer at all. Not even a bad answer or an unsatisfying answer, just no answer. I know the contract of the bounty is to attract more attention, but still no answer is quite frustrating. I don't see any moral issue with reloading the bounty for another week until the question gets at least one answer.
–
JeanApr 8 '10 at 19:09

Yes they should, and since they aren't (and I wasn't aware of that), I don't think I'll ever place another bounty. I had a question with no activity whatsoever since placing a bounty, so the rep was a complete waste. Because of this, I think the bounty implementation is flawed.

It seems unfair that this is the case. You should only pay for what you get. I realize that this is to prevent the OP having an incentive to NOT award an answer, but it also an incentive for me to NOT place a bounty altogether. I'm surprised no one found a compromise in between.
–
haelixSep 23 '12 at 15:58

And, at least one other user Tr1stan above notices that "SO should clearly state when placing a bounty on a question (Or within the FAQs) that bounty will not be returned if an answer isn't found". Probably, as in "more clearly".
–
haelixSep 23 '12 at 15:59

1

The bounty "payment" is for the post to be featured in the boutny tab. It doesn't guarantee an answer. When you place an advertisment in the paper, you are paying for the placement. If no one responds to your ad, you don't get your money back.
–
LixSep 23 '12 at 16:00

Here, you feel better now? By the way, you could read all the messages that appear when you start a bounty. It clearly says the bounty can't be refunded.
–
Shadow WizardSep 23 '12 at 16:03

Sorry to have seemed so upset, indeed this is not a problem of documentation. I might well place other bounties in the future even if this is the contract, however I maintain my view that (at least) the reputation transfer/loss should be weighted by the OP's satisfaction (or even others' as well) with the answers/comments.
–
haelixSep 24 '12 at 6:58